CEFR和CLB中语言能力框架比较研究

本文是一篇语言学论文，本文通过对CEFR和CLB语言能力、理论基础和描述框架的比较，得出以下结论。CEFR中的语言能力是指学习者或使用者运用交际能力策略性地完成包括语言交际任务在内的任务的能力。它包括语言交际活动和策略、个体的一般能力和交际语言能力。语言能力是指语言使用者或学习者在不同的社会环境和语境中运用语言进行交流、互动、表达、翻译、谈判和创造话语的能力。语言能力包括语言知识和战略能力。语言知识包括组织知识和语用知识，前者分为语法知识和话语知识，后者分为功能知识和社会语言知识。

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Research Background
Language  proficiency  scale  or  the  language  proficiency  standards  is  a  standard,  a reference point, and basis for assessing the language competence of language users and it is used to describe the competence that individuals use language to complete a series of tasks including language task (Yan, 2007). Language proficiency scale is a series of descriptions of language users’ competence that users used some kinds of languages (Han, 2006). Usually, each  scale  is  consisted  of  several  different  levels  which  line  vertically  from  low  to  high describing different stages of language competence development (Han, 2006); Lambert (1993) pointed out that an unified language proficiency scale played an important role for a state to draft a policy of foreign language learning and language use. Language proficiency scale may provide  not  only  an  identical  standard  for  language  assessment  but  also  a  reference  for language learning and language teaching (Liu, 2017). Language proficiency scale reflects the latest developments in linguistics, applied linguistics, and pedagogy, and it plays an important role in language teaching, learning, and assessment.
1.2 Research Purposes and Significance
The purposes of the comparative study of language competence framework in CEFR and CLB are listed as follows: 
1) Discuss in depth the definition and connotation of language competence in CEFR and CLB,  the  theoretical  rationale  for  language  competence,  and  the  language  competence description  framework;  and 2)  provide  a  deeper  understanding  of  the  two  language proficiency scales and their relationship with language teaching, learning, and assessment.
The research may contribute to a further understanding of the theoretical rationale for the language competence in the two language competence frameworks, and of the referential role of  the  description  framework  of  language  competence  in  English  teaching,  learning,  and assessment. 
..........................

Chapter 2 Literature Review

2.1 The Definition of Language Competence in CEFR and CLB
At  present,  the  academic  circles  have  elaborated  on  the  definition  of  language competence ability in CLB, the composition and theoretical model of language competence. The research of the above two aspects are as follows:
2.1.1The Definition of Language Competence/Ability
Liu,  Mu  &  Wang  (2017)  pointed  out  that  the  European  Council,  on  the  basis  of communicative language models (Bachman, 1990; Bachman & Palmer, 1996;Celce-Murcia et al.,  1995)  defined  language  competence  in  CEFR  as  general  language  proficiency  which included language use and communicative competence.
As for CLB, Shi (2013) held that the competence and knowledge referred to language users’  understanding  of  language,  and  language  ability  was  the  ability  which  learners  and users strategically used language to communicate with each other.
2.1.2 The Composition of Language Competence and Its Theoretical Model
In terms of the composition of communicative competence in CEFR, Fu (2009) pointed out  that  the  communicative  competence  in  CEFR  included  the  learner’s  basic  individual competences  and  the  learner’s  communicative  language  competences.  The  learner’s individual  basic  competences  were  the  basic  competences  that  an  individual  needed  to perform  a  variety  of  behaviors,  including  language  competences.  CEFR  further  refines individual  competences  into  knowledge,  skills  and  know-how,  existential  competence  and ability  to  learn;  communicative  language  competence  was  composed  of  three  components: linguistics,  sociolinguistics  and  pragmatics.  CEFR  no  longer  regards  listening,  speaking, reading and writing as the four abilities of the foreign language teaching tradition, but as the specific implementation behaviors of language decoding and coding process of the language reception and language production in the communicative activities. 
..........................

2.2 The Theoretical Rationale for Language Competence in CEFR and CLB
The theoretical rationale for language competence is an important part of the language proficiency  scale,  and  the  research  on  it  helps  learners  understand  the  connotation  of  the various components of language competence.
2.2.1 Theoretical Framework of Language Competence in CEFR and CLB
As for language competence framework in CEFR, Liu, Mu & Wang (2017) pointed out that the European Council, on the basis of communicative language models (Bachman, 1990; Bachman & Palmer, 1996;Celce-Murcia et al., 1995) defined language competence in CEFR as general language proficiency which included language use and communicative competence. Language  use  included  language  activities  and  strategies.  Communicative  competence included  general  competence  of  an  individual  and  communicative  language  competence. Communicative  language  competence  included  linguistic  competence,  sociolinguistic competence, and pragmatic competence, which constituted the general language competence framework  in  CEFR.  Different  from  the  communicative  language  competence  model proposed  by  Bachman,  Celce-Murcia  et  al.,  the  most  prominent  characteristic  of  general language  proficiency  framework  in  CEFR  was  that  the  communicative  activities  and  communication  strategies  were  classified  into  language  use,  and  the  communicative competence  was  divided  into  general  competence  of  an  individual  and  communicative language  competence.  Language  use  and  communicative  competence  are  inter-related  and mutually influential. Language use relied on communicative competence, and communicative competence developed by language to be used.

..........................

Chapter 3 Definition and Connotation of Language Competence in CEFR and CLB.... 19
3.1 Definition and Connotation of Language Competence in CEFR............................... 19
3.2 Definition and Connotation of Language Ability in CLB.......................................... 22
3.3 A Comparison of Language Competence in CEFR and CLB.................................... 23
Chapter 4 Theoretical Rationale for Language Competence in CEFR and CLB............ 26
4.1 Theoretical Rationale for Language Competence in CEFR...................... 26
4.1.1 Communicative Competence ............................... 26
4.1.2 Language Use............................... 29
Chapter 5   The Language Competence Description Framework in CEFR and CLB... 37
5.1 Language Competence Description Framework in CEFR............................. 37
5.2 Language Ability Description Framework in CLB................................ 41
5.3 A Comparison of Description Framework in CEFR and CLB. ................................. 41

Chapter 6 Implications of CEFR and CLB for English Practice

6.1 Implications for English Teaching and Learning
In recent years, more researches have been conducted on CEFR in practice than CLB, but most researches remain at the stage of theoretical exploration. There are few reports on the  application  of  CEFR  in  specific  teaching,  including  curriculum  setting  and  teaching methods.
6.1.1 Implications of CEFR for English Teaching and Learning
1)  In  terms  of  pedagogy,  teaching  institutions  can  develop  communicative  teaching methods based on the theoretical rationale for CEFR. For example, general method can be used.
First,  directly  placed  in  the  real  second  language  use  environment;  second,  directly placed in the processing and adapting language use environment, in which the step-by-step language activities include oral and written patterns; third, directly participating in the second language interactive communication activities; fourth, participating in the task designed and formulated for a second language use which refers to conducting introduction, explanation, mechanical exercises and application activities in a second language; and fifth, with the help of teachers, carrying out a variety of individual or group practice activities in an organized, planned, targeted, and evaluative manner and adjusting the activities according to interaction to meet the needs of different learners (Council of Europe, 2001).
2) In terms of teaching and learning goal, teaching institutions can adjust the goals of teaching and learning according to the language proficiency scale.
The  learning  objectives  and  levels  reflect  the  characteristics  of  foreign  languages learning. Therefore, different teaching objectives can be divided according to the language proficiency scale.

...........................

Chapter 7 Conclusion

7.1 Summary of the Study
Through the respective comparisons of language competence or ability, their theoretical rationale,  and  their  description  frameworks  in  CEFR  and  CLB,  the  thesis  presented  the conclusions as follows.
The  language  competence  in  CEFR  is  general  language  proficiency,  which  is  the competence  of  learners  or  users  to  use  the  communicative  competence  to  strategically complete tasks including language communicative tasks. It includes language communication activities and strategies, general competence of an individual, and communicative language competence.  Language  ability  in  CLB  is  the  language  users  or  learners’  ability  to  use language  to  communicate,  concerning  interacting,  expressing,  translating,  negotiating  and creating  discourse  in  different  social  environments  and  contexts.  Language  ability  in  CLB includes language knowledge and strategic competences. Language knowledge is consisted of organizational  knowledge  and  pragmatic  knowledge,  the  former  of  which  is  divided  into grammatical knowledge and discourse knowledge while the latter functional knowledge and social language knowledge.
The  theoretical  rationales  for  CEFR  and  CLB  both  originated  from  communicative language ability models. General language proficiency in CEFR not only adopts the CLA, but also has its innovations including communicative activity competence, general competence of an individual, plurilingual competence, etc. While language ability in CLB adopts the CLA, including  language  knowledge  and  strategic  competence.  The  learners’  ability  of  listening, speaking, reading and writing is reflected by language competence. 
reference(omitted)